Common issues that I've dealt pretty well with:
1. Death of major characters- this one has never bothered me as much as others, as 100 years did pass. It was bound to happen and most live on in their legacies.
2. The spellplauge/collision - Apocalypse doesn't seem to fit the theme of the previous Forgotten Realms, which was one of the major upstarts of 4e FR. Still, it's something that time alone has slowly warmed me up to. It's a major change from previous FR, but not altogether bad.
3. The change in political/cultural landscape - Necessary with the spellplague. At first I felt they went too far both with destroying nations and reestablishing old ones. In particular, I didn't really like losing Mulhorand and Unther. However, I've since come to the conclusion that they are very rich as dead civilizations, perhaps more so than as living ones.
Issues I'm still struggling with:
1. The removal of Maztica. Really, was this necessary? It may not have been the most well-executed CS but it had its value and seemed to belong, as the FR has all the major real world cultural parallels. Why could they not have just made Returned Abeir appear NW of Fearun, or merely replaced a nation or two within Maztica with it? This is perhaps the most distressing element of 4e to me.
2. Death/retconning of gods. I hated this one, it was lame. The religious richness of the setting was one of the major appeals of the setting. However, I've made peace (for the most part) with it by assuming a healthy amount of mythology is at work, and that rather than many of the deities being dead, their worship has just faded. I honestly just ignore the subsuming and still consider Talos, Sehanine, Yondalla to be distinct deites. I always see 'canon' as being mythological, so this one is easy to deal with.
3. The cosmology change - I actually don't mind the change, but I can't stand the explanation for it. I wish they'd just have said "this is a more recent dogma of how the cosmology is structured reflecting further research and understanding" rather than "Shar folded the plane of shadow into the shadowfell".
4. The comparatively poor quality of the 4e campaign book. This one is obvious. There is far less fluff in it compared to 3.5 (and before), maybe leaving many of these to the DM. Some of the omissions were really stupid though, like the removal of cultural details and descriptions of subraces and ethnic groups, as was the odd formatting of the book.
the players guide didnt even have tehtyr in it....
1. The removal of Maztica. Really, was this necessary? It may not have been the most well-executed CS but it had its value and seemed to belong, as the FR has all the major real world cultural parallels. Why could they not have just made Returned Abeir appear NW of Fearun, or merely replaced a nation or two within Maztica with it? This is perhaps the most distressing element of 4e to me.
Maztica was dropped because it was a too much of a real-world analogue. If you notice, the Old Empires, which were carbon copies + magic of Classical Greece, and Ancient Sumeria and Egypt were also dropped. It also wasn't "core" to the setting like, say, Calimshan or the Sword Coast, and so it could be removed. Now, if it REALLY angers you, and it hurts your campaign, i've seen a couple of people drawing maps that place Returned Abeir to the north of Maztica so both are intact.
2. Death/retconning of gods. I hated this one, it was lame. The religious richness of the setting was one of the major appeals of the setting. However, I've made peace (for the most part) with it by assuming a healthy amount of mythology is at work, and that rather than many of the deities being dead, their worship has just faded. I honestly just ignore the subsuming and still consider Talos, Sehanine, Yondalla to be distinct deites. I always see 'canon' as being mythological, so this one is easy to deal with.
The religious richness is not diminished imho. Most of the gods are still there, it's just that they've been organized better. As for Talos, that also got me a bit pissy (i've had some great adventures featuring the Stormlord's minions) but I've gotten used to it. Gruumsh is just as full of rage and fury, and it makes Talosians, or ex-Talosians as the case may be, even more alien and agressive. After all, you have to be pretty much off your rocker to devote yourself to Talos. Alternatively, Talos could be considered a Primordial--the lord of Earthquake and Storms--which really fits him better given the new religious set up.
Now, some of the pantheons got the shaft--the Duegar gods were killed for instance, as was almost the whole of the drow pantheon. But elevating Ghanaudar is an improvement, imho... he's a lot scarier than Vhaerun ever was... and most people i think were happy with just having Lolth for the drow. As for the Gray Dwarves, they are now either atheists or committed to the dark, relentless aspects of Moradin.
Mystra, Azuth, and Velsharoon are gone, as are Tyr and Helm, but I never liked any of them anyway. You might have a different opinion, but slimming the pantheon doesn't really hurt the religious diversity--Torm is there to pick up the slack from Tyr, for instance.
3. The cosmology change - I actually don't mind the change, but I can't stand the explanation for it. I wish they'd just have said "this is a more recent dogma of how the cosmology is structured reflecting further research and understanding" rather than "Shar folded the plane of shadow into the shadowfell".
They wanted to make the planar system more usable and comprehensive. In general, I agree with this. The Shadowfell is a lot more compelling than the Plane of Shadow because it is a reflection of the world rather than some place off on its own.
4. The comparatively poor quality of the 4e campaign book. This one is obvious. There is far less fluff in it compared to 3.5 (and before), maybe leaving many of these to the DM. Some of the omissions were really stupid though, like the removal of cultural details and descriptions of subraces and ethnic groups, as was the odd formatting of the book.
I can agree with a lot of this. I fell in love with the 3E Campaign Setting Book. It had everything. I can't feel the same connection with the new one. Then again, the designers didn't want to burden a DM with the minutiae of history and setting and wanted them to focus on the actual adventuring. They also thought that all the sub-races and such overly complicated character creation. So, it was a trade off.
Mystra's death, well okay most never liked mystra/midnight and prefered Mystra.( cant complain there Mystra did seam more lively than midnight/mystra).
Helm's death was sinceless .......
and Eilistraee's aledged death, well I'm not sure she's dead and didnt just give up her divinity....
ArchFey
Helm's death was senseless .......
Not to interfere with the discussion, but I did want to point out that senseless injustices are not only a part of life but also of good fantasy . . . and they often set up really excellent stories about setting those injustices to rights.
Just sayin'.
Cheers
4. The comparatively poor quality of the 4e campaign book. This one is obvious. There is far less fluff in it compared to 3.5 (and before), maybe leaving many of these to the DM. Some of the omissions were really stupid though, like the removal of cultural details and descriptions of subraces and ethnic groups, as was the odd formatting of the book.
I agree with you on your key points. I made peace with the new realms also and have come to enjoy some of the changes.
I highlighted this part of your post because to me it's still the biggest let down of 4th ed Realms. The campaign setting book is just lacking. I wonder how new people can play the Realms using only this and the Player's guide book.... I find myself referring to the 3rd ed campaign setting guide a lot and I think the last time I opened my 4th ed campaign guide was 4-5 months ago. I think a good book would have helped the transition.
4. The comparatively poor quality of the 4e campaign book. This one is obvious. There is far less fluff in it compared to 3.5 (and before), maybe leaving many of these to the DM. Some of the omissions were really stupid though, like the removal of cultural details and descriptions of subraces and ethnic groups, as was the odd formatting of the book.
I agree with you on your key points. I made peace with the new realms also and have come to enjoy some of the changes.
I highlighted this part of your post because to me it's still the biggest let down of 4th ed Realms. The campaign setting book is just lacking. I wonder how new people can play the Realms using only this and the Player's guide book.... I find myself referring to the 3rd ed campaign setting guide a lot and I think the last time I opened my 4th ed campaign guide was 4-5 months ago. I think a good book would have helped the transition.
Yeah, same here. It really doesn't provide enough information for someone really interested in the setting, whether they are old or new players. Cultural details are a big thing to me, and they're almost entirely absent. The book also doesn't mention a lot of things like what happened to Neverwinter, and the lack of organizations (one of the more interesting components) is noticeable.
I had the same thought you did, the someone not already familiar with the realms and/or with no resources from previous editions is lacking a lot of significant information to make the world feel alive. And, you're absolutely right about a good book helping the transition because that's what happened in 3e.
My only remaining complaint? The maps suck. Really they do. They're almost useless in game. I long for more DDi articles like we got for Sarifal and Cormyr just so we can get some good maps.
I actually don't mind making up my own lore but I'm artistically- and cartographically-challenged but I really like nice maps.
One of the pleasant surprises for me, though, is that the novels are much , much better than before. I stopped reading FR novels some time ago but have come back with some of the post-Spellplague novels and am very impressed. There are some really good authors on the roster now (and I don't include R A "Yes, I'm the George Lucas of FR novels" Salvatore in that group) with some rather good books being released.
But the maps still suck. I really want some good maps.
i was on the fence with the revision of the 3rd to 4th edition myself and this (forgotten realms) was almost a nail in the coffin for me and the new edition in general. i have now learned to become the fence and embrace both editions with equality =]
im a huge fan of the previous edition realms and the thinly laced plot devices to serve as explanations for the new realms was trite at best.
i agree with most of the things the op said with the exception for certain parts of mulhorrand unther and maztica. taking out any of the "ethnic" places/realms was a mistake i think.
i especially agree with the gods issue. to edit gods simply for the sake of too many gods was lame and it read as lame.
in my opinion if you want to edit somthing you need to make the cut/extra plot to be better then what was originally there.
(snip) i especially agree with the gods issue. to edit gods simply for the sake of too many gods was lame and it read as lame. in my opinion if you want to edit somthing you need to make the cut/extra plot to be better then what was originally there.
I agree with that.
IMC, the missing gods are gone but the explanations are unknown. The canon explanations, particularly that incredbily stupid "bizarre love triangle" will never see the light of day IMC. I will think of something else when I have to. However, the death of Mystra at Cyric's hand and by Shar's manipulation still stands and was a good way to start the reboot.
I'm happy with the loss of Maztica but I never did like it.
I am ever happier with the loss of Mulhorand and the other Old Empires even though I liked them because now I have even more Egyptian tombs with mummies I can throw into my adventures!
(The adventure we're playing now includes an ancient Greek/ancient Chessentan tomb once sacred to Zeus but now corrupted by the death spirit of Thanatos- quick trip to wikipedia for more info. It's also a rip-off, in a sense, of the original Caverns of Thracia. A dying character can attract the attention of Thanatos [who is a 5th-level elite lurker or thereabouts] and this will continue unless and until the corrupted altar of Zeus is restored.)
At some point I suspect we will play a campaign which involves the resurrection of Eilistraee. Picture a battle between Lolth and Shar where Shar is likely to win. She thinks she will have the drow to herself... but then Eilistraee appears courtesy of the PCs. Of course, that's not to everyone'e taste but it seems like a good way to finish the epic tier of a campaign to me!
However, the maps still suck. That hasn't changed since my last post.
You know it's not just that they did it period, they did it pretty badly. I agree that Mystra's death by Cyric and Shar was pretty cool, but most of the stuff other than that was just lame. Solonor is the only female Seldarine now because the others were all revealed to be aspects of human deities. Talk about stupid. Eilistraee's death could have been poignant, but comes across rather poorly. Tiamat is Bane's subordinate in Banehold? Weren't they bitter rivals in previous editions? The realms lost more than they gained in most cases.
I tend to modify the canon to my liking because I like to treat lore as mythology, so in my campaign Gods like Eilistraee, Helm, and Mask may not be literally dead, they may have just lost their following. They could resurface at any time. I also ignore most of the "Yondalla is really Chauntea" stuff. There's no reason why halflings should have the same earth god that humans have.
In fact at some point I intend to make a chart of all Faerunian deities, past and present, along with their home domains (which I'm adjusting for some) and their (believed) status. I plan to include the deceased gods and destroyed dominions, including even older ones like the Untheric Pantheon, and I plan on using it for all sorts of things in my games.
(snip) i especially agree with the gods issue. to edit gods simply for the sake of too many gods was lame and it read as lame. in my opinion if you want to edit somthing you need to make the cut/extra plot to be better then what was originally there.
I agree with that.
IMC, the missing gods are gone but the explanations are unknown. The canon explanations, particularly that incredbily stupid "bizarre love triangle" will never see the light of day IMC. I will think of something else when I have to. However, the death of Mystra at Cyric's hand and by Shar's manipulation still stands and was a good way to start the reboot.
I'm happy with the loss of Maztica but I never did like it.
I am ever happier with the loss of Mulhorand and the other Old Empires even though I liked them because now I have even more Egyptian tombs with mummies I can throw into my adventures!
(The adventure we're playing now includes an ancient Greek/ancient Chessentan tomb once sacred to Zeus but now corrupted by the death spirit of Thanatos- quick trip to wikipedia for more info. It's also a rip-off, in a sense, of the original Caverns of Thracia. A dying character can attract the attention of Thanatos [who is a 5th-level elite lurker or thereabouts] and this will continue unless and until the corrupted altar of Zeus is restored.)
At some point I suspect we will play a campaign which involves the resurrection of Eilistraee. Picture a battle between Lolth and Shar where Shar is likely to win. She thinks she will have the drow to herself... but then Eilistraee appears courtesy of the PCs. Of course, that's not to everyone'e taste but it seems like a good way to finish the epic tier of a campaign to me!
However, the maps still suck. That hasn't changed since my last post.
hey ya, which race in forgotten realms are the equivilant to the ancient greeks? i happen to be greek and would love to run a forgotten realms game with a greek influence =]
on the deities issue, the best thought of killing eilistrae to me was they wanted drow to be an evil threat again and besides a whole lot of plot reassignment ... again was written lame.
The FR equivalent of the ancient Greeks were the Chessentans, one of the leftovers from the Imaskari Empire and their capture of slaves across a number of different worlds.
I don't actually know how Eilistraee was killed because I started reading the first novel and hated it. I haven't decided what happened to her yet IMC but I do think I will kill Lolth, have Shar grab the drow for herself and then bring in Eilistraee as another option for the drow. However, this will only happen if the PCs drive the story in this direction.
1. Death of major characters- this one has never bothered me as much as others, as 100 years did pass. It was bound to happen and most live on in their legacies.
This, and the 100 year leap that caused it, has probably had the least effect on my campaign. While the major characters are nice to read about they never come up during play. Live or die, there are always more NPCs. Same with the missing gods, its irrelevant when actually running a game, the old setting did have too many. Its not like theres a shortage now, during our entire campaign maybe 10 got any mention at all during play.
2. The spellplauge/collision - Apocalypse doesn't seem to fit the theme of the previous Forgotten Realms, which was one of the major upstarts of 4e FR. Still, it's something that time alone has slowly warmed me up to. It's a major change from previous FR, but not altogether bad.
Something that had some interesting possibilities at first, but it ended up just not being usable. Unless I need to explain how something happened, I ignore the spellplague. But wait, Mithrendain is actually in the Feywild side of the High Forest? Well see, the spellplague brought the planes back into alignment...
Its a story generator, not an apocalyptic-themed campaign.
3. The change in political/cultural landscape
Basically had no effect. My campaign is set in the North and Sword Coast, where things are mostly the same as ever.
4. The comparatively poor quality of the 4e campaign book. This one is obvious. There is far less fluff in it compared to 3.5 (and before), maybe leaving many of these to the DM.
This one is a major letdown. I find myself referring to the old books often because the new one lack the basic details you need to run a game. When they give you a hollow shell for a setting and expect you to fill it, I end up filling it with previous-edition material, making it feel like playing 3e. So why did we change the setting again?
And this actually increases DM prep time, which was supposed to be lessened in 4E, because now I need to make up details on my own if I dont have the older books available. And the maps, the 4e maps across the board are empty and worthless.
I did try to maximize the value of the 4e FR book by using the adventures at the start when my campaign was young. Now in paragon tier, and we are still basing out of Loudwater, so I did get my money's worth there. If I hadnt gone that route, an entire section of the book would have been useless (and it was so oddly placed...the front? Really?).
You know it's not just that they did it period, they did it pretty badly. I agree that Mystra's death by Cyric and Shar was pretty cool, but most of the stuff other than that was just lame. Solonor is the only female Seldarine now because the others were all revealed to be aspects of human deities. Talk about stupid. Eilistraee's death could have been poignant, but comes across rather poorly. Tiamat is Bane's subordinate in Banehold? Weren't they bitter rivals in previous editions? The realms lost more than they gained in most cases.
I tend to modify the canon to my liking because I like to treat lore as mythology, so in my campaign Gods like Eilistraee, Helm, and Mask may not be literally dead, they may have just lost their following. They could resurface at any time. I also ignore most of the "Yondalla is really Chauntea" stuff. There's no reason why halflings should have the same earth god that humans have.
In fact at some point I intend to make a chart of all Faerunian deities, past and present, along with their home domains (which I'm adjusting for some) and their (believed) status. I plan to include the deceased gods and destroyed dominions, including even older ones like the Untheric Pantheon, and I plan on using it for all sorts of things in my games.
I'm with you on this one Ein. I tend to keep my Faiths and Pantheons book right at hand and have long thought about working up my own charts for the missing Channel Divinity powers as well as perhaps more Chosen ED's.
I'm waiting for something official to come down the pipeline that says "Well, really Ao is the ONLY deity and he just manifests differently to various cultures, subcultures, and takes on the form of whomever is being venerated at the moment."
-Cal
1. Death of major characters- this one has never bothered me as much as others, as 100 years did pass. It was bound to happen and most live on in their legacies.
I'm of the same opinion, at least where human characters and others whose lives would have naturally come to an end are concerned. It doesn't really bother me that Florin Falconhand died, as much as I liked him. Without magic, he wouldn't have made it anyway, and Florin doesn't seem like the kind of guy who wants to use a spell or a potion to prolong his natural lifespan. So, I'm at peace with Florin dying sometime since the Spellplague; his death didn't get mentioned, so I can write him off with a fitting end. When it comes to other characters, such as Amlaruil, whose death seems forced and doesn't contribute much, I'm not as accepting.
2. The spellplauge/collision - Apocalypse doesn't seem to fit the theme of the previous Forgotten Realms, which was one of the major upstarts of 4e FR. Still, it's something that time alone has slowly warmed me up to. It's a major change from previous FR, but not altogether bad.
I have mixed feelings about the Spellplague. I've used it in my own 4E game, but I've landscaped many, if not most, of the changes implemented by it.
3. The change in political/cultural landscape - Necessary with the spellplague. At first I felt they went too far both with destroying nations and reestablishing old ones. In particular, I didn't really like losing Mulhorand and Unther. However, I've since come to the conclusion that they are very rich as dead civilizations, perhaps more so than as living ones.
I agree that the change in landscape was necessary, and I'm still not fond of the "destroy nations to revive old ones" policy. I've already made my peace with the changes to those areas... by promptly ignoring their removal. For instance, Unther works better for me in a three-way power struggle with Mulhorand and Tymanther (which does exist in my game but covers only the southeastern portion of Unther), and Mulhorand works best for me continuing to thrive, while serving as a buffer against the now undead-dominated Thay and the rising power of the Imaskari (who are only now emerging from Deep Imaskar in the hopes of reclaiming the glory they once held.)
1. The removal of Maztica. Really, was this necessary? It may not have been the most well-executed CS but it had its value and seemed to belong, as the FR has all the major real world cultural parallels. Why could they not have just made Returned Abeir appear NW of Fearun, or merely replaced a nation or two within Maztica with it? This is perhaps the most distressing element of 4e to me.
They could have just ignored Maztica, or said Faerun's ties to Maztica were severed because of the Spellplague. Of course, the key words here are the exact reason why it was given the death sentence. The majority of feedback was negative, so the designers went with what they saw.
2. Death/retconning of gods. I hated this one, it was lame. The religious richness of the setting was one of the major appeals of the setting. However, I've made peace (for the most part) with it by assuming a healthy amount of mythology is at work, and that rather than many of the deities being dead, their worship has just faded. I honestly just ignore the subsuming and still consider Talos, Sehanine, Yondalla to be distinct deites. I always see 'canon' as being mythological, so this one is easy to deal with.
I completely ignored those changes. That's not to say I didn't remove a few deities in my own game, but they were few in number, not the massive wave of deicides (or worse, "Y was always Z") that the Spellplague introduced.
3. The cosmology change - I actually don't mind the change, but I can't stand the explanation for it. I wish they'd just have said "this is a more recent dogma of how the cosmology is structured reflecting further research and understanding" rather than "Shar folded the plane of shadow into the shadowfell".
I can accept the changes, but I've kept some of the old planes. In my own game: The Elemental Chaos is at the heart of the individual elemental planes. The Feywild is Faerie, only more prominent now. The Shadowfell is the Plane of Shadow, but I didn't mix it with the Negative Energy Plane. NEP, Ethereal Plane and Positive Energy Plane are still around, albeit without updates.
4. The comparatively poor quality of the 4e campaign book. This one is obvious. There is far less fluff in it compared to 3.5 (and before), maybe leaving many of these to the DM. Some of the omissions were really stupid though, like the removal of cultural details and descriptions of subraces and ethnic groups, as was the odd formatting of the book.
I too was disappointed with how shabby the FRCG turned out, especially compared to the effort that seemed to go into the Eberron guide. That's not to say I don't think some of the designers didn't seriously contribute to it, or that Eberron was intentionally given more focus. It was just bad luck on FR's part to be the initial, "test the waters" setting. Still, it's given me enough to work with in my own 4E game (in conjunction with last edition's FRCS).
(snip) I too was disappointed with how shabby the FRCG turned out, especially compared to the effort that seemed to go into the Eberron guide. That's not to say I don't think some of the designers didn't seriously contribute to it, or that Eberron was intentionally given more focus. It was just bad luck on FR's part to be the initial, "test the waters" setting. Still, it's given me enough to work with in my own 4E game (in conjunction with last edition's FRCS).
I like the FRCG, more or less, and I really like the ECG (although I have yet to run a game in Eberron... but I will!). You're absolutely right that there is no comparison between the two products. The Eberron maps are beautiful; the FR maps, as I have probably already noted in this thread, are unusable pieces of crap.
I have grown to really like the post-Spellplague Realms. I'm also enjoying the novels with their smaller stories and absence of RSEs (I hate RSEs in novels; I love RSEs in my campaigns). But I hate the maps. I mean I really really really hate them. And I hated them even more after I saw the maps in the ECG.
I also hate the fact that there is nowhere to go on the internet to really discuss gaming in the new Realms without all sorts of functionally illiterate assburgers wanting to threadcrap about how bad FR4E is and how it ruined their mother's basements so that they can't live there anymore or somesuch. Even Candlekeep which is one of the best sources of Realmslore is a threadcrapper's paradise if the topic is the post-Spellplague Realms.
Anyway, my campaign is really healthy. My players are enjoying themselves. And I'm enjoying statting up BBEGs in 10-15 minutes at the most. ;)
I tried a few times myself to discuss some changes in 4ed FR and all I got was posts telling me that people missed this or that god/chosen and how aweful it is to call elves eladrins and somesuch. How exarchs are so inferior to intermediate deities of old... And how bad it is to call Sehahine and Selûne the same. Too bad 'cause there's so much we could build together.
I wish we could put some thoughts on the post-spellplague FR and make it better as a community.
But any way as far as the threadcrapping and what not goes you could start up a 4e Realms group that would allow you to get rid of any thread crapping thats posted in there, I for one would sighn up. I would rather talk about 4e Realms and what we can do with it instead of how much it sucks and why i hate it.
Yes theres alot of 4e Realms haters out there. I admit at first i wasnt happy with the new Reams at all, but its starting to grow on me. Some people seem to think that WotC went out of their way to specificaly P*** them off or something. The thing that gets me is that the Realms have constantly been changing, like a real world, which is one of the things i love about it. And people what to complain now that they changed this or that? Where the hell have those people been for the last 30 or how ever many years the Realms have been around? Its been changing and evolving since it was first created.
But any way as far as the threadcrapping and what not goes you could start up a 4e Realms group that would allow you to get rid of any thread crapping thats posted in there, I for one would sighn up. I would rather talk about 4e Realms and what we can do with it instead of how much it sucks and why i hate it.
Let's not be mistaken, it was hard to digest at first, I agree with you.
But I think it's better to try and post something positive for the community, something that will bring us up-to-date with the Realms in a way we like it. I think we voiced our opinion on what we did not like enough, time to build, constructive criticism.
Good idea about the 4e Realms group. But i'm so far from being a community lead, I would join too if it is ever started though.
One of the 4E supporters needs to just run a forum/maptools/skype/whatever game of 4E FR and have us 'they ruined it sucks now' grumpards join it and then prove us wrong by making it not suck. The FR game I was in sadly died and I haven't found another FR game to join and won't play 3.5 D&D if you paid me to do it, so I'd join a 4E FR game. 
One of the 4E supporters needs to just run a forum/maptools/skype/whatever game of 4E FR
That sounds like a good idea. My buddy keeps telling me about Fantasy Grounds, I guess thats supposed to be the way to go for playin online, it costs money though, but my buddy keeps tryin to talk me into it, What gets me though is he only lives like maybe 10 minutes away, why not just drive yourself over here and do some real gaming? But yeah for people who cant get together then i could see the need to play online.
There's also MapTools, which is free, although it needs a damned PhD in it, or at least that's how it feels when I've looked at it.
Not that FG is that intuitive either, I've used FG I and FG II(Both cracked, my first group, hell, I was the only one who even owned the 3.5 PHB and didn't just use the SRD. Derp) and they're kind of annoying too. Especially running the game.
I think I've (for the most part) made peace with the new realms, and I wanted to share some of my thoughts and insights on the matter of the changes.
I have too. I play Pathfinder
Yes i hear alot about Pathfinder, do you play FR using Pathfinder rules or do you use the Pathfinder setting? They do have their own setting right? As i understand it its both a D20 based rules system and the Setting. I DL the free beta test and it looked alot like 3.5, of course i dont know what all they changed with the final version. I still play 3.5 from time to time so id be willing to to try it.
ooohhhh! burn!
Yes i hear alot about Pathfinder, do you play FR using Pathfinder rules or do you use the Pathfinder setting? They do have their own setting right? As i understand it its both a D20 based rules system and the Setting. I DL the free beta test and it looked alot like 3.5, of course i dont know what all they changed with the final version. I still play 3.5 from time to time so id be willing to to try it.
Its in own setting. I use that setting -Golarion.
They have build quite a world, on par in many ways to old FR. Every month they come out with new source material whether its articles in their Adventure Path Series or the Companion Books (for players) and Chronicles book (for DM). None of which is really required but all well written with fantastic production values. But they support their setting admirably not too unlike what WoTC used to do with FR with new sourcebook materials all the time.
The rules are basically a tweaked 3.5. I personally think 3.5 is much better than 4e but thats just me.
I will never understand why people like Pathfinder. Or 3.x. Ugh.
I can never understand why anyone would play 4th ed
Nah, I don't understand 3.x/Pathfinder because I used to play 3.5 and have come to despise it so much over the course of said play that you couldn't pay me to play it again.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm4TG56KGZ4
the video says it all....
LMAO
But any way i dont know much about Pathfinder, it does look like a clone of 3.5 and thats got me a little turned off right there, but im willingly to keep an open mind, like i said i havnt played it yet so i may be pleasantly suprised with it.
I do like 4e though and will be sticking with it. Im not saying i hate 3e or 3.5 or 2e or what ever, I even still play those systems from time to time, but there is alot in 4e i like better, like At-will powers, 6 hour rest, healing surges, the streamlined skills. All the different powers can get confusing sometimes, and some people play with cards, you could easily turn into MtG the RPG and i really dont want to see that.
4th edition? Its a nice system, not great but a nice try. (our party is playing 4th now, very dm friendly but not so good when you try to simulate all these powers describing the action to your players), Overall I could enjoy the realms in this edition at least as much as in 3rd if not more.
4e realms? In the beginning I thought that nailed it. The changes, the mutant world and the poor quality books. BUT no, after the first shock I was excited. These realms would be brand new with endless possibilities. I liked the idea that my 4e party would venture in sites and dungeons we visited 100 years ago. See the schorching marks of their past battles or how their actions affected the area in the long run if at all.
I came to realise that the real problem was wotc's strategy for the settings. Offering 3 products and then moving on... I have a gaming party. We enjoy reading a novel once in a while but thats about it. We read them because we are enjoying the world we are playing not the other way around.
Overall, I think the new realms lack continuation and support. LFR adventures and a few articles cannot compare to the support eberron and realms had back in 3e. That's what makes our setting stale with just a few refreshing ideas popping once in a while here and there. Reading fr today makes me feel like Im reading the greyhawk gazeteer in 3e. A book for some nostalgic gamers reading about an almost dead world.
they could in theory make soft cover splat books for the major areas like waterdeep, the silver marches( wont call it its new name) etc....
I just don't see it happening realistically. It doesn't fit into their model for 4e. I could, however, see them putting out a setting specific Dungeon/Dragon Annual magazine similar to the one they put out last year if there is enough fandom out-cry for a coheisve collection. It would probably sell better for those who don't subscribe to DDi and it might bring more people into the fold.
In additon, they could add more info that didn't make it to the final DDi product due to page/content restraints. Imagine a slew of never-before seen articles that just couldn't get published before the year was out by B.R. James, Matt James, Ed Greenwood, Mike Mearls (does he still write for WotC?), and many others.
They could charge 30 - 40 bucks for that and I'd definitly buy it, and I even have DDi lol.
To the authors I just mentioned............make it happen (or else)
they could in theory make soft cover splat books for the major areas like waterdeep, the silver marches( wont call it its new name) etc....
They have the numbers and those numbers don't support the cost of supporting, designing, and developing those kinds of books. Instead, you will see this kind of support in DDI. It may not be to everyone's liking, but this is the nature of the beast.
Trust me when I say that we will get out whatever Realmslore we can and ensure great effort is put into continuity and flavorful stories. WotC, despite public belief, is very receptive to pleasing fans. So if you guys keep hollering for Realmsmore, they will no doubt give it to you
*hint hint*oh, and you don't know how flattering it was to be included in the list of names above. It means a lot that you guys enjoy my Realms articles and I hope to continue doing what I can.
And these boards, of course, are the domain of functionally illiterate threadcrappers. So where to go?
they could in theory make soft cover splat books for the major areas like waterdeep, the silver marches( wont call it its new name) etc....
Luruar is actually its old name. Silver Marches is the newer name. Luruar is from 2E.
I really like the idea of a group for FR4E. I hate that there is no place on the 'net to discuss FR4E. Even Candlekeep, despite the protestations of its moderators, is profoundly unwelcoming of FR4E discussion.
And these boards, of course, are the domain of functionally illiterate threadcrappers. So where to go?
Yes a group for 4e Realms is an excellent idea. So whos going to start that up? I think the thread crapping has died down, it still goes on, but its not nearly as bad as it used to be. And as far as the illiterate part, i dont mind that so much, just as long as the meaning of the post is clear. There are quite a few posters who dont use english as a primary language.
Luruaris actually its old name. Silver Marches is the newer name. Luruar is from 2E.
I was just getting ready to point this out as well. I thought that Luruar was a newer name too, but i am finding out that alot of the "new" stuff for the Realms are actualy from older editions, or from Eds orginal home campaigns
I really like the idea of a group for FR4E. I hate that there is no place on the 'net to discuss FR4E. Even Candlekeep, despite the protestations of its moderators, is profoundly unwelcoming of FR4E discussion.
And these boards, of course, are the domain of functionally illiterate threadcrappers. So where to go?
That's what LOREMASTER.ORG is for! :
they could in theory make soft cover splat books for the major areas like waterdeep, the silver marches( wont call it its new name) etc....
They have the numbers and those numbers don't support the cost of supporting, designing, and developing those kinds of books. Instead, you will see this kind of support in DDI. It may not be to everyone's liking, but this is the nature of the beast.
Trust me when I say that we will get out whatever Realmslore we can and ensure great effort is put into continuity and flavorful stories. WotC, despite public belief, is very receptive to pleasing fans. So if you guys keep hollering for Realmsmore, they will no doubt give it to you *hint hint*
oh, and you don't know how flattering it was to be included in the list of names above. It means a lot that you guys enjoy my Realms articles and I hope to continue doing what I can.
and half of what I have found in the DDI so far, half of which I like, and the other half might as well be blank pages.
nature of the beast it may be.
But I can only top the pricetag for DDI when I can afford it , which isnt often, which leaves me back-downloading articles.
and the BEST of Dragon was less than enticing, dungeon will likely too, the best of dungeon I may end up getting at some point if it has the Drizzt article in it.... and the eye of justice article too.......
I'd get if it has the airspur articles too, as well as your( well atleast I think it ws yours) moonshae ilsearticle too.
My beef is, that despite the numbers, I dont end up reading to much of things that are not dealing with the realms, so its wasted asfaik. I see why, I just dont like it.
I wonder if it would ever end up having the best of ever just having best of dragon(FR) . best of dragon(eberron), best of Dragon( Dark Sun) splatbooks instead of jsut the best of dragon. dungeon at some point?
And these boards, of course, are the domain of functionally illiterate threadcrappers. So where to go?
me no illiturate, and FR4E iz stoopit
(snip) There are quite a few posters who dont use english as a primary language. (snip)
Yes, they are called Americans. Seriously.
OK, over to loremaster.org for some threadcrap-free posts.
As I am developing the "new" Loremaster- I intend to have some great new areas for us to put up Realmslore- instead of a single forum.
(snip) There are quite a few posters who dont use english as a primary language. (snip)
Yes, they are called Americans. Seriously.
OK, over to loremaster.org for some threadcrap-free posts.
LOL, sad but true. But any way, its not like were writing an english paper here, its a public forum for the exchange of ideas and opinions, so im not really concerened with spelling or proper grammar or punctuation, as long as the meaning of the post is clear. I still say these boards are worthwhile and i will continue to do my best to support them. But i do like Loremaster as well, some good conversationd going on over there as well, and Ed Greenwood answers questions! I'll meet you over there!
well I do have questions there for him.
as much as i'd like them answered, I'd rather have his next book
I dislike everything about it.
Well I kinda figured that one out all ready, but why?
And dont tell me its cause they changed it. Its been changing for the last 30 or so years that its been in print. And most likely before that in the mind of Ed Greenwood.
And any way this is the wrong thread for that kinda talk, this is the reconciliation one.
@Anarkis: Then why are you here? If you hate it what are you actually going to contribute? And why are you wasting your time on something you hate. I hate Dragonlance (hate may be too strong a word, but I really don't like it) so I stay away from their forums and whatnot rather than simply threadcrapping with my dislike.
@The_Silversword: My comment about Americans and their inability to write or speak English was a cheap shot, of course. To quote (or perhaps) paraphrase the late, great Winston Churchill we are, "divided by a common language." Thankfully this board doesn't allow political discussions because that's where the American (per)version of English really breaks down: too many words mean the opposite in American English that they do in real English!
@sfdragon: I will pay you money if, in future, you use "would have" or "would've" rather than the incorrect "would of". Sorry, pet hate... along with the general inability of people to use "it's/its" correctly.
I dislike everything about it.
I agree with him.
They took all of the old flavor out of the setting by jumping so far into the future and basically up ending everything will the ill conceived spell plague and the even more fooolish Returned Abeir.
Addding Dragonborn, shifters etc etc is just well, not the Realms. And whats worse, it didn't have to be that way
Addding Dragonborn, shifters etc etc is just well, not the Realms. And whats worse, it didn't have to be that way
Dragonborn in the Realms makes sense to me, The Realms have a long history of Dragons, Half-Dragons, Dragonkin, etc. So Dragonborn IMO definitely have a place there, however I dont think the Spellplague and Returned Abeir was needed to explain them there, they could of easily just said that they've always been there. I would've bought that. Same thing with Shifters, i can see a place for them in the Realms, theyer essentialy Lycanthropes, and theres plenty of them in the Realms as well. Warforged would work as well, being from Lantan or perhaps from ancient Imarski. Really I havnt seen a 4e race yet that couldnt easily be fitted in the Realms.
Dragonborn in the Realms makes sense to me, The Realms have a long history of Dragons, Half-Dragons, Dragonkin, etc. So Dragonborn IMO definitely have a place there, however I dont think the Spellplague and Returned Abeir was needed to explain them there, they could of easily just said that they've always been there. I would've bought that. Same thing with Shifters, i can see a place for them in the Realms, theyer essentialy Lycanthropes, and theres plenty of them in the Realms as well. Warforged would work as well, being from Lantan or perhaps from ancient Imarski. Really I havnt seen a 4e race yet that couldnt easily be fitted in the Realms.
Not me, shifters are Eberron. Thats one of the things that makes that setting unique. From a philosophical point of view, the decision to make all settings as conformed as possible was fatal for me
I really like the idea of a group for FR4E. I hate that there is no place on the 'net to discuss FR4E. Even Candlekeep, despite the protestations of its moderators, is profoundly unwelcoming of FR4E discussion.
And these boards, of course, are the domain of functionally illiterate threadcrappers. So where to go?
In all fairness, with certain members leaving these boards have become a lot better and there just isn't the amount of "Anything 4E, threadcrap it to oblivion" going on anymore to be honest. I for example am almost done converting some of the more interesting monsters from the 3rd edition Monsters of Faerun soft cover book to 4th edition. It's taking a while though as 3E monsters are really designed from a different viewpoint to those in 4E.
I really like the idea of a group for FR4E. I hate that there is no place on the 'net to discuss FR4E. Even Candlekeep, despite the protestations of its moderators, is profoundly unwelcoming of FR4E discussion.
And these boards, of course, are the domain of functionally illiterate threadcrappers. So where to go?
In all fairness, with certain members leaving these boards have become a lot better and there just isn't the amount of "Anything 4E, threadcrap it to oblivion" going on anymore to be honest. I for example am almost done converting some of the more interesting monsters from the 3rd edition Monsters of Faerun soft cover book to 4th edition. It's taking a while though as 3E monsters are really designed from a different viewpoint to those in 4E.
That sounds great. Really, the answer to changing these boards is for those of us to like FR4E to post content. And I say that to myself more than to anyone else.
sides, those dumb humans couldnt tell you the difference between an elven paladin and an elven fighter, so do you mean they could tell the difference between a lizardman and a dragonborn?
The elven paladin is the one wearing elven plate, elven fighters typicaly wear elven chain. Lizardmen do not breath fire!
See, us humans are not a dumb as you think.
sides, those dumb humans couldnt tell you the difference between an elven paladin and an elven fighter, so do you mean they could tell the difference between a lizardman and a dragonborn?
The elven paladin is the one wearing elven plate, elven fighters typicaly wear elven chain. Lizardmen do not breath fire!
See, us humans are not a dumb as you think.
thats just what they want you to think.
my elven paladin wears elven chain.
That sounds great. Really, the answer to changing these boards is for those of us to like FR4E to post content. And I say that to myself more than to anyone else.
4E FR is great for the people who actually, you know, play the game. I've got our year-long 4E FR campaign detailed in my sig. Once you actually set a campaign there it works out just fine.
Theres nothing wrong with the setting, just how it conflicts with peoples' memories of the Realms of old. But in fact the Spellplague did us a huge favor cleaning out the worst parts of the old Realms, like the Americas and Egyptian ripoffs and the endless army of high-level good NPCs.
4E FR is great for the people who actually, you know, play the game. I've got our year-long 4E FR campaign detailed in my sig. Once you actually set a campaign there it works out just fine. (snip)
Yeah I've followed your campaign on Obsidian Portal for some months now under at least one of my alts. I've really enjoyed what you've done.
Theres nothing wrong with the setting, just how it conflicts with peoples' memories of the Realms of old. But in fact the Spellplague did us a huge favor cleaning out the worst parts of the old Realms, like the Americas and Egyptian ripoffs and the endless army of high-level good NPCs.
By and large I agree with you. I also like the fact that by getting rid of Mulhorand there is now a good reason for having Egyptian-style ruins and tombs.
They should have use the Eggs falling from the skies during the Year of Lightining Storms for Dragonborn. Dragon Eggs falling from the sky, who will collect the most. Tiamat or Bahamut? No we get Tymanther. Which works, but I would have prefered something that used prior lore. Thats my two coppers.;)
Was just gonna make that point, but Delta got to it first.
It's the inconsistency that bugs me. WotC spent two years on the buildup to the Spellplague. Why they had to throw the baby out with the bath water is beyond me.
It's the inconsistency that bugs me. WotC spent two years on the buildup to the Spellplague. Why they had to throw the baby out with the bath water is beyond me.
There's always going to be a division between what people define as essential or not. I personally like the addition of Abeir and the titans/gods clash.
Not thrilled with what they did with Calimshan, but there's enough there to work with that I can handle it, and I just assume that the free city feels about like Calimport of old, because I like it that way.
I don't miss Neverwinter, but Luskan bores me enough that I'd be even happier if they had destroyed it instead.
And I'm very much glad that both Myth Drannor and Netheril are back. One without the other would have been much less interesting, to me.
I just don't get why they brought back Myth Drannor, but didn't mention Shaundakul anywhere. What the hell? -broken record- :P..."jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden" />
I just don't get why they brought back Myth Drannor, but didn't mention Shaundakul anywhere. What the hell?
Yeah, I never liked the "Put real world country Y and pretend it is fantasy" parts of the realms. Always the worst bits and blowing them up was the best decision they made.
Theres still plenty of real world influence in the Realms. Kara-Tur is still there, and as far as I know Zakara is still there, And Maztica is still around, its just on Abeir now. I'm not sure about the Old Empires, from the decription from the 4eCG, it sounds like pieces of Abeir just smacked into it, effectively squishing any one unfortunate enough to be there. I kinda liked Maztica myself, even though it was an obvious Aztec/Mayan rip off, I always wished they would do more with it, I wonder what theyre up to in New Waterdeep these days?
In all fairness, with certain members leaving these boards have become a lot better and there just isn't the amount of "Anything 4E, threadcrap it to oblivion" going on anymore to be honest.
While the latter may be true, I don't agree with the former statement. The Realms sub-forums are in a sorry state, judging by the "last post" entries. There was a time when you had to check the second and even third page of a sub-forum for the most recent posts. Now the time of the last post is measured in months even on the first page of all three sub-forums. And I'm not talking about the time of the 4e announcement until the "end" of the edition war (well, it didn't really end, but the emotions have simmered down, and many users have left since then anyway), but about before all that.
So if the activity on these boards is any indication, the Realms don't seem to have the draw they used to have.
DB
In all fairness, with certain members leaving these boards have become a lot better and there just isn't the amount of "Anything 4E, threadcrap it to oblivion" going on anymore to be honest.
While the latter may be true, I don't agree with the former statement. The Realms sub-forums are in a sorry state, judging by the "last post" entries. There was a time when you had to check the second and even third page of a sub-forum for the most recent posts. Now the time of the last post is measured in months even on the first page of all three sub-forums. And I'm not talking about the time of the 4e announcement until the "end" of the edition war (well, it didn't really end, but the emotions have simmered down, and many users have left since then anyway), but about before all that.
So if the activity on these boards is any indication, the Realms don't seem to have the draw they used to have.
DB
this sadly is true
WotC should just merge these forums, and then merge it with the Living Realms Forums. To much divison in the Realms fanbase now. One group here, another group over there. The Living Realms get much, much more activity. Just a thought...
think I agree with you there as long as Cyric didnt put you up to it
FYI Vader wins that fight.;)
[ON-TOPIC]Yeah, the FR fanbase is pretty fractured.
FYI Vader wins that fight.;)
Nuh uh Obi Wan wins, cause he becomes more powerful than even Vader can imagine!
And Vader still got to join him at the end. So yeah Vader still won in the end.;)
Yes I am still salty over that.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Dt5BVVAMGg&feat...this is what the divided FR community is
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MLp7YNTznE&feat...
I AM
this is what the divided FR community is
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MLp7YNTznE&feat...
...we're a bunch of tripped-out Brits who mumble and shout words that no one can understand..??
I don't think the division is all that much there anymore. People who have felt strongly against WotC's decisions and spout 4E must Die and Rich Baker must DIE!!! and all that trash have gone, sure but I think it's left the space for others with valid questions of the Realms new and old to step up and feel like a contributing member of this community rather than a "lurker" afraid to speak their mind wihtout verbal lashings and abuse.
Suffice to say, while I miss Rin, LK, and yes even GEV I think the forums are more centered and focused on creativity and helping others play in the Realms rather than the constant edition war that plagued them in the days of old.
Speaking of those old chaps.....you guys could stop by and give a cameo or a wave of hellos every once in a while!!!
I think the forums are more centered and focused on creativity and helping others play in the Realms rather than the constant edition war that plagued them in the days of old.
And when you say, 'days of old', you mean, near a year go, tops :P
Gomez
Anyway on to the topic. While I perfer the olds Realm to the new as I perfer my ongoing game and the heavy handed way they did...just doesn't sit well with me.
Though truthfuly I could play in a 4thEd game except for two things about it that don't work for me...
1) The Spell Plague pretty much knocked the heck out of the world...yet they didn't follow though. Areas that should be knocked hard was untouched. The example that I just don't makes sense of is Rasheman. I really have no idea on how the witchs managed to retain full power over the kingdom considering that magic went crazy?
2) As mentioned before the cultural details would be nice...if I had time to create cultures on my own I wouldn't be buying this book. I mean a example of this...if you don't have any background into Realms why would the Sharess is a undergod of Sune? I mean according to the write up( actualy just a small table) Wouldn't make more sense if the goddess of cats be a undergod of a nature deity?
It is these things that when I look in a neutral way just has me go "What?"
PS: I am in game with both LK and Rin...I'll tell them to stop by to say "Hi" when I see them next.
1) The Spell Plague pretty much knocked the heck out of the world...yet they didn't follow though. Areas that should be knocked hard was untouched. The example that I just don't makes sense of is Rasheman. I really have no idea on how the witchs managed to retain full power over the kingdom considering that magic went crazy?
I think the witches power was more than just magic. they likely had a lot of coult - and earned respect - that helped then through teh rough yeras. Also, Rasheman magic was abit different. It may have been primal, and then it would likely not have been affected by the spellplague at all. Rasheman witches may be akin (game-wise) to druids or shamans.
2) As mentioned before the cultural details would be nice...if I had time to create cultures on my own I wouldn't be buying this book. I mean a example of this...if you don't have any background into Realms why would the Sharess is a undergod of Sune? I mean according to the write up( actualy just a small table) Wouldn't make more sense if the goddess of cats be a undergod of a nature deity?
Well, we know that the FRCG is a bit... ah... meager when it comes to cultural details and backgrounds.
But that doesn't really invalidate the setting itself.
With the old lore...it just doesn't work. The Witches were always heavily on arcane and strong worshipers of Mystra.
Also I though the Spell Plague was how all magic got rewritten to work with 4th ed rules...if Primal was not effected...shouldn't they be well unaffected class wise?
Anyway I am not saying that they couldn't have kept in power but there should have been atleast a little explanation. Or even a change in society as the Witchs lost some power. I just think it needed maybe a extra paragraph that is all...though most of the things in the book needed a extra paragraph. 
As to your second...this is the rub...they did it attract new people to the Realms by cutting out all that history and background. Yet they did such a weak job covering the stuff I don't see how a new player could get into this campaign setting without the background inhomation. So did they really accomplished what they set out to do. Sure it is widely played...but that is because it is the RPGA's setting and most RPGA players that I know really don't really care about the setting.
But then again I am also against the whole 2 books per setting idea...I mean I can understand it but maybe a extra book a year( it could even be just compiled articles from Dragon) wouldn't flood the markert too much.
but the 3rd isnt worth mentioning as it would of done better as DDI, and given up a book of FR lore.
its 3 books and ddi actually.
but the 3rd isnt worth mentioning as it would of done better as DDI, and given up a book of FR lore.
You are right I forgot the module...that is what you are saying correct? Or is there another book you are meaning?
I do find it interesting in that they are changing the format though with Dark Sun. It looks the combing the Player Book and the Campaign setting and are adding a Monster of Dark Sun book. I wonder if they go back and release a Monster of book for Fr and Eberron.
they also said that they were not going to shoe horn DS into the 4e POL issues( personally, I think they only said that becuase DS was the Poster setting of POL anyway.... thats just me though).
which means, whats found in DS stays in DS..... well it is to early to tell whether or not it will have the can be used here or there disclaimer.
umm sory I meant given us a book of FR lore instead of the adventure splat.
they also said that they were not going to shoe horn DS into the 4e POL issues( personally, I think they only said that becuase DS was the Poster setting of POL anyway.... thats just me though).
which means, whats found in DS stays in DS..... well it is to early to tell whether or not it will have the can be used here or there disclaimer.
Actualy DS was never a POL setting...there are no POL in that setting. Except maybe Tyr post Sorcerer king...but that was more of a neutal city....so maybe it is a POShady spot.
Anywat back on topic I think it is sort ironic my opinion about my opinion on 4th ed FR...I hate the Spell Plague...but my problem with 4th ed FR taken on it's own is that the Spell Plague didn't have enough effect.
but this is best just left, since its
not in my realms
Spellscars for every body!
-This message brought to you by the Order of Blue Fire
Have you hugged a Sharn today?
Spellplague Rules!
Spellscars for every body!
-This message brought to you by the Order of Blue Fire
Have you hugged a Sharn today?
When I read this I had a flash back to Gamma World. There was a Cryptic Alliance that pretty much seeked out radiation to get mutations and though everybody should too....please tell me that the Order of the Blue Flame is not like this?
Spellplague Rules!
Spellscars for every body!
-This message brought to you by the Order of Blue Fire
Have you hugged a Sharn today?
When I read this I had a flash back to Gamma World. There was a Cryptic Alliance that pretty much seeked out radiation to get mutations and though everybody should too....please tell me that the Order of the Blue Flame is not like this?
Yes, It is exactly like that!
Spellplague Rules!
Spellscars for every body!
-This message brought to you by the Order of Blue Fire
Have you hugged a Sharn today?
When I read this I had a flash back to Gamma World. There was a Cryptic Alliance that pretty much seeked out radiation to get mutations and though everybody should too....please tell me that the Order of the Blue Flame is not like this?
Yes, It is exactly like that!
he politely asked not to be told that.
Shudder...shudder...It is ok. You know I don't get it they made FR Post Apocalypse setting even borrowing concept from Gamma World( the one just discovered + Plagues lands and spell scars = radiation and mutation.) Yet did not go all the way. So it is very...meh.
Now flash forward. They are releasing as the third campaign world Dark Sun the grand daddy of Post Apocalypse fantasy settings...
And just annouced that the re doing Gama world.
Heck Eberron as some Post Apocalypse setting elements also with the Mournlands. And is a hige post war setting.
I am hope eventualy they will come out with a campaign world that is a Pre- Apocalypse setting just for some varity
But really I wouldnt count the Realms as post Apocalyptic setting, I mean yeah things got shook up pretty good, but its a 100 years later, so things have more or less stabalized.
I actullay liked that they had an ingame explanation for why things changed. I'll admit I hasnt at all happy with the changes at first, but i admit, it is starting to grow on me.
And the Order of Blue Fire isnt all that bad, I mean its not like theyre trying to turn everyone into Sharns. Not yet any way, thats Phaze 2
I do find it interesting in that they are changing the format though with Dark Sun. It looks the combing the Player Book and the Campaign setting and are adding a Monster of Dark Sun book. I wonder if they go back and release a Monster of book for Fr and Eberron.
No, Dark Sun is getting 3 books just like every single other setting only has 3 books. Dark Sun there isn't enough player material they felt warranted its own book, so they combined the normal players book and campaign guide.
They are not going to release further books for campaign settings, they want to focus on making more campaign settings and not flooding the market with lots of books a good chunk of players have no interest in. Dragon is doing pretty well with articles (some of the time anyway) these days as well, so this strategy is definitely working well.
While I personally would like (and would buy) more 4E Realms and Eberron books it won't happen.I am pleased though they are more likely to take chances of settings and giving a wider range of settings to use. That's something I really enjoy because I'm finding that I no longer like setting every game in the same setting - variety in settings is actually proving to be much more interesting for my creativity and my players.
At the same time, I totally would buy more FR and Eberron books. I still find it a little disappointing that the only future support will be from dragon.
Shudder...shudder...It is ok. You know I don't get it they made FR Post Apocalypse setting even borrowing concept from Gamma World( the one just discovered + Plagues lands and spell scars = radiation and mutation.) Yet did not go all the way. So it is very...meh.
Now flash forward. They are releasing as the third campaign world Dark Sun the grand daddy of Post Apocalypse fantasy settings...
And just annouced that the re doing Gama world.
Heck Eberron as some Post Apocalypse setting elements also with the Mournlands. And is a hige post war setting.
I am hope eventualy they will come out with a campaign world that is a Pre- Apocalypse setting just for some varity
It is really weird that everything is post-apocalypto. The analogy of Gamma World to the new F.Realms is spot-on, hadn't really thought of it that way before. Maybe they're trying to cash in on the overall concept. Did Dark Sun sell really well, or something?
I wonder if they'll go back to the cheeziness of the original Gamma World when it's redone, or if they'll go for a more serious remake?
I do find it interesting in that they are changing the format though with Dark Sun. It looks the combing the Player Book and the Campaign setting and are adding a Monster of Dark Sun book. I wonder if they go back and release a Monster of book for Fr and Eberron.
No, Dark Sun is getting 3 books just like every single other setting only has 3 books. Dark Sun there isn't enough player material they felt warranted its own book, so they combined the normal players book and campaign guide.
They are not going to release further books for campaign settings, they want to focus on making more campaign settings and not flooding the market with lots of books a good chunk of players have no interest in. Dragon is doing pretty well with articles (some of the time anyway) these days as well, so this strategy is definitely working well.
While I personally would like (and would buy) more 4E Realms and Eberron books it won't happen.I am pleased though they are more likely to take chances of settings and giving a wider range of settings to use. That's something I really enjoy because I'm finding that I no longer like setting every game in the same setting - variety in settings is actually proving to be much more interesting for my creativity and my players.
At the same time, I totally would buy more FR and Eberron books. I still find it a little disappointing that the only future support will be from dragon.
Actualy from what I understand from a friend who owns a gaming store and talking to other people the Campaign books never sold all that well as compared to the Players guide book. Also if you have no interest in the Campaign World you have no reason to buy a Campaign Book. But the Players Guide and a Book O' Monsters is useable for everyone because the mechanics are transportable to anyplace. That is why I am thinking they changed the format of how the release the campaign.
Also while I agree that flooding the market with campaign books is not that useful and liked that back in 2nd edition they had a a wide choice of campaign worlds a campaign setting Monster Book would sell to more players than those who are only interested in the campaign setting. Also they could release a book the size of those New Races Books...the production cost is not that bad on those and would make people happier.
lol, yes a pre-apocalypse setting would be a change of pace!
But really I wouldnt count the Realms as post Apocalyptic setting, I mean yeah things got shook up pretty good, but its a 100 years later, so things have more or less stabalized.
I actullay liked that they had an ingame explanation for why things changed. I'll admit I hasnt at all happy with the changes at first, but i admit, it is starting to grow on me.
And the Order of Blue Fire isnt all that bad, I mean its not like theyre trying to turn everyone into Sharns. Not yet any way, thats Phaze 2
Um...yeah. While the organization is not that bad...turning everybody into Sharn is bad...well in my opinion.
It is really weird that everything is post-apocalypto. The analogy of Gamma World to the new F.Realms is spot-on, hadn't really thought of it that way before. Maybe they're trying to cash in on the overall concept. Did Dark Sun sell really well, or something?
I wonder if they'll go back to the cheeziness of the original Gamma World when it's redone, or if they'll go for a more serious remake?
It is really easy to do the POL thing in a post-apocalypto world. Especialy that is very well established...personaly I am getting a little tired of the POL aspect...
The only rumor I have heard that I am nervous about is that there is going to be collertable card aspect to the rules...for mutation and tech. That usualy never works out.
it wont happen, the map stands a better chance than the reprint.....
but it wont happen either
edt: spelling
It is really easy to do the POL thing in a post-apocalypto world. Especialy that is very well established...personaly I am getting a little tired of the POL aspect...
The only rumor I have heard that I am nervous about is that there is going to be collertable card aspect to the rules...for mutation and tech. That usualy never works out.
Collectiable cards, sounds like they're going for a Magic: TG thing. It's a way to generate extra money, but yeah, it's terrible for an rpg unless they're redesigning it to actually be like Magic. I really don't like card games though, they'll ruin Gamma World if they go that route.
It is really easy to do the POL thing in a post-apocalypto world. Especialy that is very well established...personaly I am getting a little tired of the POL aspect...
The only rumor I have heard that I am nervous about is that there is going to be collertable card aspect to the rules...for mutation and tech. That usualy never works out.
Collectiable cards, sounds like they're going for a Magic: TG thing. It's a way to generate extra money, but yeah, it's terrible for an rpg unless they're redesigning it to actually be like Magic. I really don't like card games though, they'll ruin Gamma World if they go that route.
Does no one remember the card support that early editions gave to settings such as these? I find it surprising how many people feel this is a new phenomenon.
which was the ending of 2nd and the begining of 3rd.
I knew of no such things
Does no one remember the card support that early editions gave to settings such as these? I find it surprising how many people feel this is a new phenomenon.
I don't really know if it's new or not. I used to play D&D way back in 1E, and just now thought I'd get back into the game. Not fond of the cards thing, though, seems too boardgamey, or Magic: TG, which have always felt like they were for little kids. Reminds me of the cards you'd get at age 7-8, along with bubblegum packs. Cool for little kids, but it seems like silly stuff to me.
It is really easy to do the POL thing in a post-apocalypto world. Especialy that is very well established...personaly I am getting a little tired of the POL aspect...
The only rumor I have heard that I am nervous about is that there is going to be collertable card aspect to the rules...for mutation and tech. That usualy never works out.
Collectiable cards, sounds like they're going for a Magic: TG thing. It's a way to generate extra money, but yeah, it's terrible for an rpg unless they're redesigning it to actually be like Magic. I really don't like card games though, they'll ruin Gamma World if they go that route.Does no one remember the card support that early editions gave to settings such as these? I find it surprising how many people feel this is a new phenomenon.
I thought the cards were great back then...I even think the cards for the 4th ed powers is a good idea. Card with power summarys and rules are great time saver(you can do it on index cards yourself really.
But haveing those cards be collectable? Which mean cards would be uncommon and rare? Is also not a new idea...I remember one other game that did it...Dragon...something. It failed.
The idea of finding a piece of tech or gaining a mutation and drawing a card to random see what you get is I like. The problem with being collectable is that you get a pack and don't what you get....and that get bothersome because of the some cards will be rare...others will be uncommon...and since it is random you could end up with the worst mutations ever. If the removed the collectable part from it It would be a great idea. They could get it to work but I don't see how really.
It should also be noted this is a rumor I heard. I haven't read anything personaly from WotC that either supports this or denies it.
Shh, don't even imply that you might even potentially think FR is even remotely at all post-apocalyptic. At least three people will throw an epic hissyfit. I've still got someone blocked from the last time.
Really? It got that bad?
I was never really into Gamma World, but Im interested to see how they bring it into 4e.
Shh, don't even imply that you might even potentially think FR is even remotely at all post-apocalyptic. At least three people will throw an epic hissyfit. I've still got someone blocked from the last time.
Really? It got that bad?
I dont think it ever got that bad, and Ive never thrown a hissy fit.
I dont think the cards for Gamma World will be randomized collector packs, I think itll be preset packs, like you want these extra powers and feats and stuff? then buy these cards. I dont think the cards will be vital to play.
I was never really into Gamma World, but Im interested to see how they bring it into 4e.
All heard was a rumor...though mutations and finding tech was a very big part of the game.
Yeah, all Ive heard is rumor and speculation as well, guess we'll have to wait and see what they do. Im hoppin that they dont make a collectible card game out of it. Im guessing that they'll be like the class power decks, but who knows?
I don't care that much about what they do. 4th ed was pretty much the end of line with me buying anything from WotC till they put out a 5th ed D&D then we'll see.
But yes we'll have to wait and see...
Also it might be just one of many things they are thinking of and just leaked it to see the reaction people would have.
I'm sorry 4e didn't work out to your tastes. Hopefully you have some other games to keep your interest.
It is ok. You can't please everyone all the time. I like playing lots of diffrent systems...I still play 3.5, Champions, Rifts, etc.
community.wizards.com/the_jester/blog/20...
I like the idea of using cards so that you don't have to come up with a new chart every time a supplement comes out. And the custominzation of silly vs seriousness...etc.
I still don't like the collectable aspect of it. You can still have the above two great ideas with out the collectable part of it.
Though it looks like a 5th will be coming out in 2 years....if it is a test bed.
me and my money will go elsewhere
Shh, don't even imply that you might even potentially think FR is even remotely at all post-apocalyptic. At least three people will throw an epic hissyfit. I've still got someone blocked from the last time.
Really? It got that bad?
I dont think it ever got that bad, and Ive never thrown a hissy fit.
He's just trolling pretty much.
My distastes are for people holding on so tight that they would rather see a world completely fail, than continue its development. No one said the world is perfect and everyone will never like changes made- but that should not equate to a defeatist mindset where one would rather destroy than nurture.
I wasn't saying you did, Silversword.
And I am playing nice, Delta, I'm just noting that last time that topic got brought up there was a flame war.
just as long as nobody would ask to have the weave explained at that point...
And I am playing nice, Delta, I'm just noting that last time that topic got brought up there was a flame war.
Something that you are certainly trying to help aren't you?
I could if you want bring up the point that anyone who thinks 4E FR is post-apocalyptic doesn't know anything about post-apocalyptic settings and literature again, if you'd like?
And I am playing nice, Delta, I'm just noting that last time that topic got brought up there was a flame war.
Something that you are certainly trying to help aren't you?
I could if you want bring up the point that anyone who thinks 4E FR is post-apocalyptic doesn't know anything about post-apocalyptic settings and literature again, if you'd like?
Actualy all I said is there a serveral similarities to a post-apocalyptic world( plague land and radiation....spellscars and mutation....The Order of the Blue Flame is a rip off of a cryptic alliance from Gamma World). That is all. The fact is the Spell Plague is a apocalyptic event. And you are right 4th ed is not a total post-apocalyptic world. That is the problem though...it should be with the Spell plague.
hehe, the LAst Time the Realms were Post apocolyptic, Netheril fell
You bring up a good point. When the Spellplague hit, shouldnt they have fallen again? If anything the Shades seem to have become even more powerful, wasnt their magic affected as well?
hehe, the LAst Time the Realms were Post apocolyptic, Netheril fell
You bring up a good point. When the Spellplague hit, shouldnt they have fallen again? If anything the Shades seem to have become even more powerful, wasnt their magic affected as well?
That is the core of my problem with looking at 4th edtion FR....it is not that it is a post-apocalyptic setting...it is the fact that it is not a post-apocalyptic.
A 100 years with no magic...or very weak magic since it has to be rediscovered...no tech...massive land upheavals...a 100 years is not enough time. Especialy with th new magic being very much weakened. And since the Weave touched everything(except for some small dead zones) everything should have been hit just as hard.
At the same time, it's not something that ever comes up in my games or is required to justify it given my players didn't care for/read much about the previous editions. So it's pretty ignorable as a problem for me as a DM in the regard. I would be hard pressed for an explanation beyond "It's out of control magic" to say why it wasn't complete devastation everywhere (especially in the likes of Netheril, who got out completely untouched, amazing!).
Yeah, now that I can see where you're coming from I couldn't agree more. The designers of the 4E realms had really two frames of mind, they used the Spellplague to remove and destroy some areas - but there is no adequate explanation for its absolute lack of any effect on others. It makes it seem very arbitrary in its nature and too much like a deus ex machina. While I like the result, the method and even with 100 years as a time jump - just isn't enough to logically explain why everyone else bounced back to normalacy quite quickly. As you say, people adapted to the change in the way magic worked really pretty quickly when you think about it.
At the same time, it's not something that ever comes up in my games or is required to justify it given my players didn't care for/read much about the previous editions. So it's pretty ignorable as a problem for me as a DM in the regard. I would be hard pressed for an explanation beyond "It's out of control magic" to say why it wasn't complete devastation everywhere (especially in the likes of Netheril, who got out completely untouched, amazing!).
I think a part of it was they were trying to change it...but not too much in risking the ire of the fan base...or atleast tried to minimalized it.
And you are right alot of players and DMs wouldn't care that much in all probability. And alot of players and DMs would end up probably hand waving it and play with the now instead of dwelling on the past. It is just personaly it makes just stop and say WTF? How come x is untouched?
I agree, though, it's a bizarre kind of apocalypse. Having read the Empyrean Odyssey, it's really well-described as a massive multiplanar cataclysm. But having skimmed the new campaign guide, it's super-downplayed in most areas except for the few areas that were radically changed. Plus, a lot of those changes feel downright gimmicky. What I've read so far about the original fall of Netheril, that was way better described in terms of the damage, exodus of the survivors, and the recovery afterwards.